Not Just a Simple Bowl:
The Cultural Biography of a Handcrafted Monks’ Bowl
Jenna Noelle Antonino DiMare
ARCH1600—Archaeologies of the Near East
February 18, 2008
After a fiery bowl of tum yum soup, I huddled on the back of a Tuk Tuk and flipped through
my Lonely Planet guidebook, searching for a mellower and more “authentic” alternative to the
ubiquitous tourist-packed wats, or Buddhist temples of Bangkok. “Just when you start to lament the
adverse effects of tourism, pay a visit to this handicraft village,” I read, and I knew I had found just
the adventure I was looking for (124). Today, I am filled with fond memories as I glance at the
black, handcrafted monks’ bowl sitting upon my bookshelf, knowing that its significance far
transcends its utilitarian value. The monks’ bowl and the ritual of alms that accompanies it are
defining aspects of Thai culture, and the disappearance of traditional methods of producing the
bowl reflects a socio-cultural paradigm shift.
In a dilapidated shantytown off Bamrung Muang Road in Bangkok nestled between
Chinatown and the Golden Mount temple, sits the Monks’ Bowl Village, or Baan Baat. Here, under
corrugated iron roofs and amongst rubble, six families of artisans handcraft traditional monks’
bowls. Baan Baat is a nostalgic throwback to the days before the advent of the automobile caused
stifling, limitless urban sprawl in Bangkok. The capital was historically organized into small
neighborhoods, determined by occupation. Today, these neighborhood identities have dissipated,
and the Monks’ Bowl Village is an anomaly.
However, the Monks’ Bowl Village is not only traditional in terms of the neighborhood
artisan cooperative model; it is even more unique because it is the last manufacturer of handmade
metal monks’ bowls still operating in Bangkok. During King Mongkut Rama IV’s mid-19th century
reign, the standard earthenware alms bowls began to be replaced by more durable steel bowls. As
the metal bowls were dramatically less prone to cracking, they quickly burgeoned in popularity, and
Baan Baat thrived as Bangkok’s primary supplier. During the village’s heyday, it contained 100
families and produced 400-500 bowls a day (O’Reilly 48).
2
In recent decades, the Monks’ Bowl Village’s sales have plummeted due to the popularity
and affordability of mass-produced industrial bowls, often imported from China. Today, the village
produces less than 5% of its former yield.
Even though the bowls are sold for 800 Baht
(approximately $20), five times the price of machine-made bowls, profit margins are dangerously
low. In fact, production costs alone can comprise 75% of the selling price (O’Reilly 50). According
to the chairman of the Almsbowl Association of Thailand:
Most have already given up. Many of the dealers at Sao Chingcha who used to be our patrons have turned to
the mass-produced bowls. Cheapness aside, the alms bowl mass-producers offer a better deal by giving a few
months’ credit, while we ask for prompt cash. Without a definite market in sight, we people around here, one
after another, are just saying goodbye to this profession. The younger generation goes out seeking day laboring
jobs to make ends meet (O’Reilly 49).
Still, the devoted craftsmen laboring in the Monks’ Bowl Village insist that their bowls are higher
quality and longer lasting than the mass-produced bowls. They claim that, in addition to tourists
purchasing the bowls as souvenirs, some full-time monks still prefer and use the bowls. In particular,
the monks of the stricter Thammayut sect, founded by King Mongkut Rama IV himself, strongly
prefer the traditional bowls made at the Monks’ Bowl Village.
Not only can production costs alone equal 75% of the selling price, but the process of
forging the bowls requires a prodigious expense of labor. As a visitor to the Monks’ Bowl Village,
one of my draws was to witness the process, as promised in the Lonely Planet guide. The labor is
divided into various tasks, each performed by a specialist in the village, who then passes the bowl
onto another craftsman to perform the next step. Eight separate thin strips of steel cut from sheet
metal form the bowl, representing the eight spokes of the wheel of Dharma and the Eightfold Path
the Buddha followed to enlightenment. Thais almost exclusively are Buddhist, and the country is
steeped in Buddhist symbolism, art, architecture, and ritual. Each of the eight segments is beaten
and curved over a ball-shaped anvil and attached to a short stem stuck in the ground. Teeth are
then cut along the edges so that the bowls can be interlocked and hammered together, using copper
3
paste. Afterwards, the bowl is buried in a wood fire for a few minutes until the copper melts,
wielding the joints. Finally, small indentations pounded with a hammer give the bowl relief and a
spectacular texture, and the bowl is fired with a smooth coat of black lacquer. The ultimate product
is exquisite and refined, emanating a handmade, one-of-a-kind quality.
Although today the handmade bowls are primarily purchased by eager tourists like myself
looking for an “authentic” Buddhist souvenir, they are a fundamental aspect of Thai culture,
absolutely essential to the vitality of monks and the karmic endeavors of laypeople. “Objects can be
understood only through looking at the cultural contexts which originally produced them and the
new circumstances into which they later moved,” explain Gosden and Marshall (174). Monks’ bowls
are one of the eight material possessions traditionally permitted to monks, and every morning for
thousands of years monks have walked the streets gathering alms in their personal bowls. However,
the bowls are the antithesis of the cup a beggar waves desperately at passersby, as the monks are
doing just as much of a favor to laypeople as the laypeople are doing for the monks. In accepting
alms, the monk allows the commoner to gain merit, or karma, a vital concern in Buddhist cultures.
For this reason, it is considered anathema for a monk to thank givers for food, as this gesture would
imply that the act was merely a personal favor, meaning the giver would not gain karma.
Anthropologist Claude Levi-Strauss theorizes that “the personal bond between the giver and the
receiver,” defines gift giving (20). In the case of the monks’ bowl, the bond is less personal but
more of a prearranged cultural ritual, which has been taking place for thousands of years. Thus, the
significance of this type of gift is implicitly understood, and verbal communication between giver
and receiver is superfluous and unconventional. In fact, the monks’ bowls are such culturally and
religiously charged objects that an elaborate code governs their use. These regulations include, “A
monk must not look inside another monks bowl,” and “A monk must not cover up the curry in his
bowl with rice to make it appear he hasn’t been given any curry” (Ward 93).
4
Reflecting the fact that the bowls are imbued with a rich religious significance that
transcends their status as material objects, the inhabitants of the Monks’ Bowl Village have an
annual wai kru ceremony during which they pay respect to the leader of their community and the
spirits of their ancestor craftsmen. Held on a Thursday in April, during this celebration the village
assumes a bit of the bustling, vivacious atmosphere it used to always have at times when there was a
greater market for the bowls. The patriarch of the community leads the ritual, and he dabs the
center of each community member’s forehead with a fragrant paste as they gather to show their
respect for their ancestors. The scene is completed by traditional Thai dancers, along with food
offerings presented to the small shrines called spirit houses protecting each craftsman’s home.
Flower garlands, a common religious object in Thailand, are draped over the tools during the
ceremony (O’Reilly 49).
The Thai alms bowl is the lifeblood of the monks who carry it, and the transformation in its
production method sheds light on the rapid pathology of industrialization and tourism that has
affected Thailand. When tourists visit the Monks’ Bowl Village and purchase the bowls, they are
often completely unaware of the rich social and religious tradition they are connecting themselves
with. Ironically, today most monks cannot afford to purchase a handcrafted traditional bowl, and
tourists are the primary patrons that keep the Monks’ Bowl Village alive. This shift carries with it a
shift in significance and usage of the bowls, which often sit as proud tokens on travellers’ mantels or
bookshelves as opposed to being used by monks to collect alms. Can the Monks’ Bowl Village
today still be called legitimately authentic or traditional when it would not survive without the
patronage of tourists, or is this a bastardization of the original meaning of the bowls? The very
tourists whose funds make it possible for the village to continue practicing the craft of their
ancestors are simultaneously the greatest contributors to a the shift in the cultural biography of the
bowls.
5
References
Cummings, Joe, et al. Thailand. England: Lonely Planet Publications, 11th Edition, 2005.
Gosden, Chris &Ywonne Marshall. “Cultural biography of objects.” World Archaeology. Volume 31,
No. 2: 169-178.
Hoskins, Janet. “Agency, biography and objects.” Published in Handbook of Material Culture. C. Tilley
et al. (eds.), p. 74-84. London: Sage Pub.
Into Asia. < http://www.into-asia.com/bangkok/districts/banglamphu.php> Into Asia, 2000-2006.
Accessed on February 18, 2008.
Levi-Strauss, Claude. “The Principle of Reciprocity.” The Gift: An Interdisciplinary Perspective. Ed. Aafke
E Komter. Holland: Amsterdam University Press, 1996.
O’Reilly, James & Larry Habegger. Travelers’ Tales: Thailand. Berkeley, CA: Publisher’s Group West
(p. 147-151), 1993.
Ward, Tim. What the Buddha Never Taught. IntermediaCT Books, 2007.
6